ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In occupational epidemiology, a male-centered perspective often predominates. We aimed to describe current research practices in terms of gender consideration at different stages of epidemiological studies. METHODS: A systematic review of occupational lung cancer publications indexed in PubMed was conducted over the period 2003-2014. Articles were described according to the sex composition of their study sample. RESULTS: In 243 studies, 7 (3%) were women-only, 101 (41%) were mixed, with a disproportionate men-to-women ratio (P50 = 3.5; P75 = 12.4). A shift was observed from mixed and unspecified source populations to men-only final samples. Our results also suggest implicit generalization of results from men-only studies, a lack of tests of interaction and often unjustified sex-adjustment for mixed studies. CONCLUSIONS: The lower proportion of women in studies cannot be fully explained by their under-representation in the target populations, since there were large numbers of women among both potentially exposed workers and patients diagnosed with lung cancer.
Subject(s)
Bias , Epidemiologic Research Design , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Sexism , Epidemiologic Methods , Female , Humans , Industry , Lung Neoplasms/etiology , Male , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , OccupationsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To explore public perceptions and behaviours related to the risk of flavivirus and alphavirus infection in Southeastern regions of France following the recent colonisation of the Asian tiger mosquito, Aedes albopictus, and the identification of four autochthonous cases of dengue and chikungunya fever in these regions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional telephone survey using a proportional random digit dialling selection method. SETTING: Interviews were conducted from 28 November 2011 to 29 January 2012 using a computer-assisted telephone interviewing system. PARTICIPANTS: 1506 French speaking adults aged 18 years or older residing in French Mediterranean regions. RESULTS: Protective health behaviours were found to be performed less frequently among men (AOR=0.65, 95% CI 0.52% to 0.80%), residents with lower educational status (AOR=0.61, 95% CI 0.43% to 0.85% for respondents with primary school education; AOR=0.69, 95% CI 0.53% to 0.90% for those with some secondary school education), and those living in regions where the Aedes mosquito is objectively rare (AOR=0.60, 95% CI 0.36% to 0.98% for Aude; AOR=0.63, 95% CI 0.44% to 0.89% for Herault; AOR=0.56, 95% CI 0.34% to 0.93% for Eastern Pyrenees). Empirical results also suggest that behavioural responses to infection risk are greater shaped by the perceived exposure to Aedes, notably the perceived frequency of mosquito bites (AOR=2.07, 95% CI 1.84% to 2.32%) and visual identification of Aedes mosquitoes in one's immediate environment (AOR=1.98, 95% CI 1.45% to 2.71%) rather than by other common predictors of protective behaviours. CONCLUSIONS: These findings may help with the development of innovative instruments designed to make more visible and personal the threat of flavivirus and alphavirus infections induced by the presence of A albopictus in order to promote significant behavioural changes among populations at risk.
